^1^^
'l\<r. fij.htf \f-'i. fi
, S, p, 10
wmtm
.€Ui
-li»itl)ont tuiniiromisf.
RDAY, JUNE 11, 1853.
slaveholding ? Tf the powers conferred upon the
general government are now pro-slavery, the mere
tiiet of slaves being counted aH a basis of represen-
tation, however impolitic, involved no guarantee of
iSlavery itself.
Kut where waa the proof, in the Constitution, that
this three-fifths representation was a representation
of slaves ? There was no evidence of this to be de-
rived from the words of the instrument; the only
evidence lay in an indirect ini}>licati()n. It was just
so in regard to what was caWed the Fugitive Slave
Clause. Notwithstanding that he might, be willing
to admit that slaves were intended to be implied in
the phrase 'other persons,' still, if the objects of
the confederacy were strictly defined, and no sanc-
tion was given to Slavery, then they would certainly
grant that it was no sacrifice of principle to accept
it. Such was the fact.
The Fugitive Slave Clause waa not a power con-
ferred upon the General Govertiment. As all the
leading Free Soilers had expressly contended, it was
a compact between the people of the States who
entered into the Union. If there was any obligation
to give up fugitives, it rested solely with the States
the Hiselv^>ar The courts had made their decisions
I upon jt, but we were not bound to execute any de-
cision which conflicted with the higher law of God.
If there were any clauses in the Constitution which
conflicted with the straight-forward principles of
right, we were bound to set them aside, and regard
them as the idle wind. In the vigorous language of
a noble New England poet (J. R. Lowell), whose
words were familiar to thousands who live on the
broad praires and along the mighty river of the
• V GSt"'
' Though we hreak our fathers' promise, we have nobler
duties first,
The traitor to Humanity is the traitor most accursed-
Man is more than Constitutions; better rot beneath the sod,
than be true to Church and State, while we are doubly false
to God ' •'
In saying this, he believed he spoke the sentiments
of tree Soilers generally. When they had succeeded
in repealing the Fugitive Slave Law, and -secured
the right interpretation, he did not believe that it
would be possible to prove, to the satisfaction of
twelve Northern men, that any slave claimant had
a right to his so-called property. It was because the
South knew this, that they were so unwilling to
yield the usurped power they had conferred upon
the l-ederal Government.
In relation to the bugbear of the power of the
Union being pledged to put down slave icsurrections,
he had only to quote the opinion of John Quincy
Adams, that the carrying out of the clause in refer-
ence to this subject would result in the eman«ipa-
tion of the slaves, since the local law would in such
case be superseded by martial law, and the master
could give no evidence to prove his claim to hold
property in his fellow-being. Now, he would ask
them candidly to consider the results of giving up
their jurisdiction in this matter. They tied them-
selves hand and foot, and gave themselves over to
the enemy. It had been justly said, that Mr. Gar-
rison was not so much feared at the South as some
Free Soil men. If he could sit down with a dozen
Georgia slaveholders, or any other Southern men,
and explain to them that these Abolitionists would
not raise up their hands to strike out the law which
provides for returning fugitive slaves, they would
not give five dimes for Mr. Garrisons head. For
his part, he felt like exercising all his rights against
the atrocious system. He had been to the South ; he
[had friends there; and the more he saw of the
n fernal system, the more fully was he convinced
to refute them. Whether the Constitution is An
Slavery or not ; whether it goes for slave-catching .
not; whether it grants the right of slave represei
ration or not ; all these things are done under i
and have been sanctioned, without a note of remoi
strance, as a matter of course, ever since the form
tion of the government. Now he would appeal ■
the civilized world, if there was ever a more glarin
absurdity than to attempt, in the face of our nationi,
history, in view of the injustice of this countrl
toward the coloured race for two hundred years,
persuade the people that they have totallv misunde
stood the matter, and what they had supposed to 1
black, was altogether white 1 Did not Washingtoi
and Jefferson, and Patrick Henry, and John Mail
shall, and their contemporaries, understand thi
Constitution 1 Yet they held but one opinion abo«
it. Reference had been made to the opinion expresse
by John Quincy Adams, to the effect that, in case
great national exigency should occur— a formidabl
invasiori from abroad, for example— Congress won!
be justified in abolishing Slavery, under the wa,
power, as a measure of national self-preservation
But this was clearly an exceptional case, and di
not affect the question under consideration. Wha
Mr. Adams thought of the Constitution itself, in it
relation to Slavery and the slave trade, he has tol
the world in very explicit language— as follows :
' // cannot be denied— tuk slaveholdxng lords of th
SODTH prescribed, AS A CONDITION OF THEIR ASSEN'i
TO THE CONSTITUTION, three special provisions to se
CURE THE PERPETUITY OF THEIR DOMINION OVER THBI]
SLAVES. The first was the immunity, for twenty years o
preserving tlie African slave trade; the second was thestipu
lation to surrender fugitive slaves— an engagement positiveh
prohibited by the laws of God, delivered from Sinai; and
thirdly, the exaction, fatal to the principles of popular repre
sentation, of a representation for slaves— for articles of mer
chandise, under the name of persons. ... To call go
vernment thus constituted a democracy, is to insult the un
derstanding of mankind. It is doubly tainted with the'
infection of riches and Slavery. Its reciprocal operation
upon tne government of the nation is to establish an artifical
majority in the slave representation over that of the free
people, in the American Congress; and thereby to make
THE preservation, PROPAGATION AND PERPETUATION OF
SLAVERY THE VITAL AND ANIMATING SPIRIT OF THE NATIONAI
GOVERNMENT.'
Did John Quincy Adams understand his country's
Constitution I Were his allegations entirely desti-
tute of truth 1 Why, there was not a Court in the
country which did not recognise the pro-slavery
character of that instrument ; there was not a legis-
lative body which did not recognise it ; Congfess
had uniformly done so; and also the National Exe-
cutive and the Supreme Court. The people had
always regarded it in the same light, and the people,
could not be mistaken, because it was the embodi-
ment of their will. He (Mr. G.) deemed it inex-
cusable to attempt to whitewash the character of
the framers of the Constitution, by representing that
they intended to give no sanction to Slavery, and
declaring that they were the friends of impartial
liberty. Such a statement was against all the facts
of their hves. Why not seek to whitewash the
character of the men who passed the Fugitive Slave
Law ? The Fugitive Slave Law ! Had not the pas-
sage of that Law convulsed the whole country i
Was not all Europe filled with horror in view of it ''
But, according to the logic of his friend from Ohio'
no such Law has ever been enacted by Congress or
attempted to be enforced by the government ' AH
this prodigious excitement— this world-wide feeling
of moral indignation— was the result of gross misap-
prehension ! He called upon his friend from Ohio
to show that the Law, so universally execrated, con-
tained one single sentence or word which authorized
Slave -hunting or slave- catching, or required the
lurrender of fugitive slaves ! It referred solely to
persons held to service or labour '—using the exact
language of the American Constitution. Now if the
*>"■'-'
.,vW^^--'
-•'-«"-■"' ■ *
/■♦•>i3r- '■'!''-)
; - v^ Z:^:
■\-/--:.^--: - -:;
■ "'■T^'-*''- .'-•■' '■■'■
':']:W-%
^ ^^r^}:
*
/-
"'<.'/., .■
.■>:-:■ r
»■
vords 'persons held to service or labour,' in the
..onstitution, cannot, do not, and were never intended
lo apply to fugitive slaves (and this is the ground
Assumed by those who maintain the Anti-Slaverv
Iharacter of that instrument), then it is just as cer-
■ain that they can have no such meaning or applica-
■lon in what is called the Fugitive Slave Law Bat
Is It would be to outrage the intelligence of the
lountry to deny that the express design of that Law
Ivas the seizure of fugitive slaves, and the punish-
oent of such persons as sought to secrete them, so
t IS equally preposterous to assert that the Constitu-
lon contains no compromises on the subject of
When did the white people of this country ever
shibU any feelings of compassion, any friendliness
I spirit, for the coloured population ? For two cen-
fcries, they had outraged them in every way, and
lodden them like ashes under their feet! When
W It been possible for them, intelligently and pur-
bsely, to adopt a Constitution, embracing on equal
■rms with themselves, those whom they had thus I
Juelly despised and systematically proscribed 1
1 This conflict with the Slave Power was not simply
■matter of verbal criticism, but it had reference to
li overshadowing and an all-controlling system of
Ipression, which was to be met and vanquished by
tnething more potent than an ingenious play upon
brds. We have been challenged to prove^ that the
brd SLAVE IS in the Constitution-that it contains
lything adverse to human liberty. It is true that
^such word is found in the instrument; neither
U It ever contain the words ' foreign slave trade '
vet, for twenty years after its adoption, that trade
Is prosecuted under the American flag, as a led-
tiate branch of the commerce of the country— afa
^stitulzonal right It is equally certain that, in
|ir treatment of the coloured people, our fathers
fre guilty of great injustice, before God. They
not take the black man into their embrace ■ they
I not recognise his manhood; and to this hour he
Seated more like a leper than an American citizen,
lo, then, it was not true that our fathers made an
li-Slavery Constitution. In their state of mind
^a8 morally impossible for them to do so. It was
Itheir intention to do any such thing. Doubtless i
Ivas a very easy thing, on that platform, for his
Ind from Ohio to make the Constitution all Anti- '
Tvery; but what would the South make of if
\l with his interpretation of it, where was the Union ?
they suppose that the South meant to submit to
li a criticism as that— meant to yield to an Anti-
very interpretation of the very instrument they
! fashioned themselves, and which was shaped
ctly to their own liking? It was the acme of
|ituation !
s for the remark of his friend, that the South
erred the action of the old organization to that
lie hree Soilers, was it so ? It was a novel piece
Intelligence. If the South did not understand his
ition, and that of the American Anti-Slavery
lety, in regard to the Union and i;o voting, it was
because they had not tried to make it plain
truth was, the old organization was the only
which Southern slaveholders respected, because
' clearly understood the issue presented to them
bxibly and uncompromisingly. But, as for this
mpt to get round the bargain, this quibbling
M words, the South hold it to be equally despi-
and dishonest; and they would regard such
iiterpretation as a virtual declaration of war, if
■iiforcement were attempted. They would feci
iselves justified in rising up as one man, and
'ling the last drop of blood in their veins, to
'mt the carrying out of this interpretation. Our
■rs did agree to sustain Slavery ; the people
lid to it ; and the instrument remains as it was
tially, in regard to its pro-slayery compromises,
ind those who acted with him, acknowledged
iin, and would not attempt to cloak it; tliere-
they could not consent to bo members of a
Irnment that upheld it, and required acquies-
; and participation in it. Therefore it was that
washed their hands of it, and stood outside
God and innoccncy, crying in the ear of the
I, 'No Union with Slaveholders, religiously or
'cullij ! ' (great cheering)
r. John, T, Hii-ton defended the course and
in of the old-organized Anti-Slavery Society,
lid the coloured race (to which ho belonged)
always recognised Mr. Garrison and his asso-
as their true and clear-sighted friends, lie
ed God for preservinj^ this Society, for pre-
,ng and prolonging the life of Mr. Garrison, and
ling him to speak in fitting terms of the corrup-
iind iniquities of the slaveholders.
iourncd
sil
I
I
f
s
t
?
Is
Hi
c
«1
Ih
w
ti
te
b(
rn
th
of
ri(
N<
ma
3flfrtiaii8.
IVESTERN UNITARIAN CHRISTIAN UNION.
At tho half-yearly meeting of this Association,
held at Cheltenham (England), on Wednesday,
May 4th, John B. Estlin, Esq., of Bristol, moved
the following resolution : t S^3*
" Thftt, at the present period of unexampled interest
throughout the civilized world on the important subject
of American Slavery, this meeting considers that Uni-
tarian Christians are called upon by their principles
and position as a re<igiaus body to respond to the
solemn appeal of the ' British and Foreign Anti-Slavery
Society,' and earnestly hopes that at the approaching
auniyersary of the ' British and Foreign Unitarian
Association,' a faithful and Christian exhortation may
be addressed to our brethren of a common faith iu
America, affectionately entreating them, in some way
corresponding to their social influence and elevated re-
ligious views, to bear their testimony against Slavery,
and to use their utmost efforts for its speedy abolition."
" That n copy of this resolution be sent to the Com-
mittee of the British and Foreign Unitarian Associa-
tion, with a request that they will take such measures
for carrying it out as may in their judgment be most
efficient."
Resolved, " That a copy of these resolutions be sent
to the ' British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society,' with
the sincere thanks of this meeting for the timely and
valuable address to Christians of all denominations, a
document eminently calculated to aid and encourage
American Abolitionists in their ardous and unremitting
labours, and which it is hoped will, under the Divine
blessing, be instrumental in arousing the Christian
community to a sense of its duty to the oppressed
slave."
Mr. EsTUN said, it would be seen that the resolu-
tion referred to the portion of the report that
noticed the address of the " British and Foreign
Anti-Slavery Society " to Christian churches. He
observed that a year ago he should have felt it
requisite, on such an occasion, to have made some
statements explanatory of the nature of American
Slavery, but "Uncle Tom's Cabin" has rendered
that unnecessary ; it had instructed Englishmen
that, to force men contrary to their will to the per-
formance of oppressive labours all their lives, and to
rob them every day of their daily earnings, was not
exactly carrying out the Christian rule of " doing to
others as we would that they should do to us," not-
withstanding the exhortations of American clergy-
men to the contrary : and England's heart was at
length compelled to feel sympathy with those who
had to see an aged mother, a Deloved sister, a beau-
tiful daughter, separated from their dearest ties by
men boasting of their Christianity and liberty,
placed on the auction-block, and sold to the highest
bidder. As the "British and Foreign Anti-Slavery
Society" had paid the Unitarians a compliment, not
always bestowed on them by their orthodox brethren,
in considering them as a portion of the Christian
church, he would proceed to show what -were the
relations of tho Unitarians of America with the
Slavery question. Compared with other religious
sects in the United States, the Unitarians were few.
The Baptists, for instance, had 8,000 ministers, and
about a million church members. Unitarians had
244 societies, of which 235 were in the eight free
States and only 9 in the slave States. The number
of ministers in the body was 207, of whom 200 were
in the free States. Church members w ere variously
estimated, from 15,000 to 30,000, probably the
real number was between these extremes. With
the holding of slaves. Unitarians could have but little
connection, but the guilt of maintaining Slavery did
not rest solely with those who claimed ownership
n human beings. Among the Unitarians of the
lUnited States, there stood forth some noble exam-
les of independent spirit and Christian conduct
IChanning's writings against Slavery were known to
|all. The eminent and amiable Folien sacrificed all
jhis worldly prospects to his fidelity to the cause of
humanity. Dr. Henry Ware took up the cause to
ome extent. The Rev. Samuel J. May, whose in-
Iteresting conversation with Dr. Channing on Slavery
Iforms one of the most touching anecdotes in the
" Memoirs" published by the Rev. W. H. Channing,
13 still labouring in the great cause'. And there are,
also, the Rev. Dr. Furness, of Philadelphia, Dr. Wil-
lard, John Pierpont, Theodore Parker, Samuel May,
junior, W. H. Channing, James F. Clark, Higginson,
Wallcutt, and perhaps half a dozen more, who have
boldly taken the part of the slave. All these have
suflfered for the cause; either by the injury of their
worldly circumstances, or of their social position, or
by the estrangement of friends ; and with these ex-
ceptions the great mass of Unitarian ministers have
been silent on the slaves' wrongs, while some have
spoke in favour of his oppressor. The Rev. Theodore
Ciapp, of New Orleans, has been quoted by Mrs.
Stowe, in her " Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin," as a
pro-slavery divine. Mr. E. read the paragraph at
page 65, and also some extracts from a Sermon by
the same Minister, in which he says. " the venera-
ble patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were all
slaveholders" — " the same God who gave Abraham
sunshine, air, rain, flocks, herds, silver and gold,
blessed him also with a donation of slaves." " Here
we see God dealing in slaves, giving them to his
own favourite child— a man of superlative worth —
and as a reward for his eminent goodness ! " Dr.
Dewey's revolting declaration in reference to the
Fugitive Slave Law was universally known. Dr.
Gannett, of Boston, had, in a printed sermon, recom-
mended the return of the fugitive slave to his mas-
ter. The Rev. Mr. Allen, formerly of Washington,
now of Bangor, Maine, had printed a sermon in
praise of the Union, urging for its maintenance obe-
dience to the Fugitive Slave Law. As a religious
body, the American Unitarians had never given any
help to the Anti- Slavery cause ; on the contrary,
they had obstructed it. Any efi'ort to have a recog-
nition of the sin of slaveholding, and of the duty of
taking some measures for its removal introduced
into the annual conventions or meetings of " Ame-
rican Unitarian Associations " have been successtuly
resisted. The Christian Regis'er, the organ of the
body, may fairly be classed with pro-slavery papers.
The New York Correspondent of the London Times
complimented it as being an honourable exception
to the religious journals of the free States, in conse-
quence of its having counselled obedience to the
Fugitive Slave Law ! In the two last numbers, evi-
dence of its hostility to the Anti-Slavery cause, and
of its unfairness, is afi'orded by the republication at
full length of a letter from the Rev. Edmund Squire
of S. Boston, which appeared in the Inquirer of
March 5th, in defence of the " Mission of Silence "
on the Slavery question, as advocated and practised
by the American Unitarians, while Mr. Bishop's
able reply, in the Inquirer of March 19, is entirely
suppressed. Ibis apathy of our brethren in the
United States was injurious to the Abolition move-
ment, and discreditable to them as professed Chris-
tians, and it acted as a poison upon nearly all who
came within its influence. Our laymen go to
America, and return, telling us that Slavery is by
no means so bad as it is Represented ; that the ne-
groes are utterly unfit for freedom ; that emancipa-
tion would derange the commercial and political
institutions of that country. Our ministers visit
their transatlantic brethren, and assure us that there
is much comfort among the slaves; that the Aboli-
tionists are occasioning mischief ; that the Unitarian
Ministers are doing all that they consider necessary
to put an end to Slavery, and that we, unable to
judge of their difSculties, must not judge their con-
duct. The last homily preached in this strain to
British Unitarians, was in the letter just referred to,
written by Mr. Squire to the Inquirer ; he there re-
fers to the Abolitionists, those noble men and women
who have convulsed the Union by their untiring
efforts— as being " the worst foes to the slave," and
as having " re-fastened his chains with tenfold tight-
ness " when just falling off, and then advises that no
direct aseression should be made on Slavery, but that
it should be left for " Christianity " to be its victor !
Mrs Stowe has, however, dispelled some of these
delusions; the Unitarian Abolitionists declare to us
that we are as competent to appreciate the difficul-
ties of their brethren as they are. Mr. E. was in-
formed by Mr. Bishop that, when in America, he
uniformly inquired what were those difficultiei which
could not be understood in this country, but was
never able to learn a single circumstance with which
he was not previously acquainted ! Mr. E. spoke of
Mr. Bishop as having done great honour to the
British Unitarians by his protest against Slavery, in
the Baltimore Unitarian Convention, a testimony on
the part of an English minister travelling in Ame-
rica, almost without example. Mr. Estlin trusted
the resolutions he had to propose would bo passed,
and that they might be sent by a delegate to tho
Committee of the " British and Foreign Unitarian
Association." Ho hoped that body would not again
reject the appeal matje to them, as they did two
years ago, upon the ground that tho consideration
of such a subject would bo foreign to tho rules of
the association. Mr. Estlin acknowledged himself
to be one of those intolerant persons so censured at
that time for wishing to exclude from our pulpits
American ministers who had abetted, or been silent
upon, the iniquity of Slavery. He did not presume
to judge how far, in the sight of God they were
biamable, as we could not estimate the strength of
their temptation, or know how wo should act if
placed in their circumstancou ; but ho did not
understand that charity which forbade the exercise
of our moralFperceptions, and required us to surren-
der our power of discriminating between right and
wrong ; ana he was so constituted, that religious
services conducted by such ministers as Dr. Dewey
or the Rev. Theodore Clapp, would not awaken or
cherish any devotional sentiment in his heart. After
an address of some length, and expressing the hope
of having been able to show that the " Union " had
good grounds for complying with the request of the
" British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society," Mr.
Estlin concluded by saying, " our Unitarian bre-
thren in the United States may not have taken any
direct part in persecuting their coloured country-
men, but tho clothes of the persecutors had been
laid at their feet ; their own garments may not have
been dyed in the blood of the slave, but they have
stood 80 near, and so idly, by the altar of avarice, of
impurity, and of power, on which he has been sa-
crificed, that they have not escaped being sp^irtkled
with his blood; we call upon them as brothers
descended from the same stock with ourselves, as
speakers of the same language, readers of the same
Bible, as Christians, as Unitarians, to go, to Wash,
and be clean."
The Rev. S. A. Steinthal, in seconding the reso-
lution, said, I feel great diffidence in following a
gentleman who, like Mr. Estlin, has devoted a life
to the study of the intricate question of Slavery.
We all owe him a debt of gratitude for what he has
done in this subject ;»but I confess he has caused me
some very painful feelings by the remarks he has
just made. I did know that Unitarians in America
had taken up what appears to me to be an unworthy
position in respect to Slavery, but I was not aware
how deeply stained our religious body was with this
sin. W.e have heard how mtach Unitarianism con-
duces to freedom, how civil and religious liberty is
its standing motto ; even at our dinner to-day that
toast was most warmly received, but here we find
that Unitarianism has not shrunk from supporting
the foul sin of Slavery. We have been told of hor-
rors connected with Slavery; I believe they are in-
separable from it ; but this is not a question of hor-
rors ; it matters not whether fathers have been torn
from their children, whether husbands have been
separated from wives, or daughters sold to shame ;
these things do occur, but this is not the question
for us; we have to do with the great principle that
Slavery is a sin ; that no man has a right to hold a
fellow man in bondage for one hour ; this is the prin-
ciple of the question, and on this I am ready to take
my stand and meet any slaveholder or slave apolo-
gist. Sir, the question is simple indeed ; but when
we find that Unitarians are guilty of upholding a
system by which this right is given to men, is it not
time lor us to step forward and try to arrest their
course 1 Are we not deeply interested in the mat-
ter, if we love pure Christianity, if we love our pure
faith "J 1 do therefore most sincerely trust that, at
the approaching meeting of the Association, a most
decided stand will be taken on the subject of Slavery.
The Association is founded for the promotion of Uni-
tarianism, because Unitarianism leads, we believe,
to moral excellence in men, not merely for the love
of a name, and surely a practical means of proving
the true Christian spirit of Unitarianism must come
within its scope. If it does not, I must say it is time
there were a change in its constitution, and I, for
one, shall be ready to promote it : I trust, however,
no such step will be necessary : but that the sole or-
ganized representative that English Unitarians have
will prove that we, as a body, will not countenance
so hideous an iniquity.
The Chairman, Rev. R. B. Aspland, in putting the
resolution, said that had it jjontained anything like a
pledge to exclude from our fellowship those of our
American brethren who might not accord with us on
the subject of Slavery, he for one must have protested
against it, even though he had stood alone in this
course. But he saw no reason why they should not
unite in such a resolution as that which was before
the meeting. His hope had certainly been, at one
time, that the Christian principle and feeling ol
America would have put down Slavery. But recent
legislation in the United States, and the manner in
which the Fugitive Slave Law had been enforced,
had convinced him that the churches there had not
taken that noble stand for freedom which could have
been desired ; and he feared there was too much
reason for thinking that they were indirectly sus-
taining Slavery, even when they did not openly give
it their sanction and support.
;'<»Vi!
